Category Politics

A Nation Party of Whiners

Unfuckingbelievable.
Literally. If I hadn’t seen the video myself, I would’ve thought this
was the left-wing spin machine blowing things out of proportion.

Yeah, I know C&L is on the left, but ignore the title and
commentary and just watch the video.

Summary: House GOP leaders said that the bailout bill failed because
of a “partisan speech” by Nancy Pelosi. Quoth John Boehner:

I do believe that we could have gotten there today had it
not been for this partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor
of the House. … The speaker had to give a partisan voice that
poisoned our conference

Roy Blunt:

We worked together well to try to come up with a
compromise that could pass today, that the president could sign, that
would do what needs to be done on the economy, but every time you’d
turn on television or read an article about the press reports of what
the other side was saying, it was all about how either Republicans
were unpatriotic, were there too late, or whatever.

Mommy, they’re saying bad things about me in the papers! Make them
stop!

Eric Cantor:

Right here is the reason, I believe, why this vote
failed. This is speaker Pelosi’s speech

What do you think they served at their cheese-and-whine party? I’m
guessing Waahmontillado.

The sooner these crybabies join the Federalist and Whig parties in the
dustbin of American politics, the happier I’ll be. They can cry all
the way to the bank if they like, but they’d better hurry before the
bank collapses.

Political Photoshop O’ the Day

McCain Defeats Truman

Creative Commons License

(Explanation for anyone who isn’t a political wonk with no life and doesn’t get it. And for those who don’t remember history.)

Reminder: Pulpit Initiative Today

For those who weren’t paying attention, today’s the day of the
Alliance Defense Fund’s
Pulpit Freedom Sunday,
in which pastors are protesting the fact that their churches’
tax-exempt status comes with strings attached, namely rules against
endorsing political candidates, same as any other non-profit
organization.

From what I’ve seen, the news coverage is mostly unsympathetic. The
Post’s On Faith column has a
guest post
in which the author tries to defend this act of civil disobedience,
and gets smacked down in the comments.

So it looks as though most people recognize that the participating
churches are trying to have their cake and eat it too, and can cry me
a tax-exempt river.

Skin Conductance and Political Affiliation

Ed Yong has an
article
up at
Not Exactly Rocket Science
about a researcher who found a correlation between involuntary startle
responses and support for various political/social programs:

When we’re suddenly confronted with a shocking image, our skin becomes moist and we blink strongly. These actions are automatic and unintentional; they happen without conscious thought. So it may come as a surprise that they can also predict some of our most seemingly considered beliefs – our political attitudes.

According to a new American study, the stronger these responses, the more likely people are to support the Iraq War, Biblical truth, the Patriot Act and greater defence budgets. Conversely, people who show weaker “startle reflexes” are more likely to support foreign aid, immigration, gay marriage and abortion rights.

He calls the connection surprising, but I’m not so sure.

Read More

CNN Missing the Point on Pulpit Initiative

Background: the
Alliance Defense Fund,
a right-wing religious group, is backing the
Pulpit Initiative,
in which, on Sep. 28, 2008, a bunch of pastors will give sermons
directly endorsing specific political candidates. They’re hoping to be
sued, and to use the suit to overturn the law against churches
directly endorsing candidates.

CNN’s Rick Sanchez hosted a “he-said, he-said” exchange about this:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9vsNx5ooBU&hl=en&fs=1]

Read More

“I don’t want to explain”

I’m going to pick on
a random freeper
(via
FSTDT)
because he makes an argument that I’ve seen elsewhere: in response to
a question about how gay marriage might possibly affect him and his
own marriage, he writes

er it’s forcing me to explain to my kids why two men or two women are doing what they are doing.
I have to explain that nature did not intend for two of the same sex to be together and that they like to be together for perverted sexual acts

So people’s freedom to marry whomever they love should be restricted
because you don’t want to explain it to your children? Puh-leeze!

I hate to break it to you, honeycakes, but explaining the world to
children is what parents do. It’s part of the job description. Oh,
and when I say “explaining the world”, I mean the world as it is, not just as you would like it to be.

(Thanks to Fez for letting me borrow his sarcastic endearment set.)

Election Math

One cluster of reasons people sometimes give for not voting is that
“none of the candidates represent my views, and I’m tired of voting
for the lesser of two evils.”

(Another, of course, is plain old apathy. A coworker of mine is very
straightforward about not caring about who gets elected. He knows
he’ll catch shit from the rest of us if we catch him complaining about
the government that he didn’t bother to help elect, and he doesn’t.
For people like him but who aren’t quite out of the closet, here are
some tips on
pretending to give a shit about the election.)

Read More

Like Letting Students Grade Their Own Homework

This is retarded:

The Bush administration yesterday proposed a regulatory overhaul of the Endangered Species Act to allow federal agencies to decide whether protected species would be imperiled by agency projects, eliminating the independent scientific reviews that have been required for more than three decades.

[…] Under current law, agencies must subject any plans that potentially affect endangered animals and plants to an independent review by the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service. Under the proposed new rules, dam and highway construction and other federal projects could proceed without delay if the agency in charge decides they would not harm vulnerable species.

I’m sure I’m not the only one who thinks that this is as stupid as
letting the defendant at a trial decide whether he’s guilty or not, so
I won’t belabor that point.

But even with the best intentions on everyone’s part, this is still a
stupid idea.

There’s a joke about an old engineer called out of retirement to help
fix a machine at the factory where he used to work. After poking
around, he puts a chalk mark on the part to be replaced, and submits a
bill for $30,000, itemized as follows: “Chalk mark: $0.50. Knowing
where to put the chalk mark: $29,999.50”.

The EPA is in the best position to tell where environmental chalk marks should
go. It’s what they do. That’s why they have environmental experts. The
department of transportation may be great at planning and building
roads, but they can’t be expected to accurately predict how their work
affects the environment, any more than the EPA can be expected to
design and build an efficient highway system.

Spreading American Values

From the Post:

China announced late last month that it would permit protests during the Olympics in specially designated zones, as long as demonstrators first secured permits. […]

[Human rights groups] say the “protest pens” being set in Beijing parks are part of China’s Potemkin-village-like display for the Summer Games, which open Friday.

Gee, I wonder where the Chinese might’ve come up with that idea.

Read More

W < 1 FU

It just occurred to me that the Bush presidency will officially end in roughly one Friedman Unit. Whee!